click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121205
20121213
STATION
MSNBCW 9
KQEH (PBS) 6
CNNW 3
MSNBC 3
KQED (PBS) 2
WHUT (Howard University Television) 2
CNBC 1
CSPAN 1
CSPAN2 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
WETA 1
LANGUAGE
English 32
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)
of beneficiaries, our leader nancy pelosi was very clear. it's a question of math. you simply don't get the revenue or kind of savings. logically, i think what americans think about this, who is at fault for the rise? is it the beneficiary? going after the person receives the benefits, and that's the way to balance the budget? if we are at 17% of gross domestic product for health care and our closest competitor is at 10% and as universal health care, if you think we have full room to drop the costs? you think there are a lot of inefficiencies in the system? when you look at medical devices and pharma and doctors and insurance, yes, there's room. as we lead up to the exchange that will be put in place in 2014, that's where we should be working. here's the compromise. the exchange opens in 2014. this is a republican designed concept where you allow the free market and competition to take place. and a lot of good benefits, many of which are in effect already, including dealing with pre- existing conditions, capping costs so no one has to lose their house over health care, providing for screening and p
. but you've said you wouldn't support the petition by nancy pelosi. >> well, i'd like to ask leader pelosi how many discharged petitions she supported when she was speaker. i mean, the reality -- that's a little game. it's not going to be helpful. it's not going to get anything done. and no, i would never sign a discharge petition against my own speaker or my own conference. the way you do things is to negotiate. and frankly, the negotiation is going to largely involve the president of the united states and the speaker of the house of representatives. with all due respect to the other players, they're honestly less central to this. and if they can come to a deal, then i think we can avoid the fiscal cliff. >> and do you think that -- somebody put this idea out here. and this idea is really vile. i'll use the right word. i think you'll agree. here's the idea. let's go off the cliff, just for purely political reasons, nothing happens immediately, and then, you know, you all come back in session in early january, and you give the middle class a tax cut, and you give the wealthy a tax cut, the
65 to 67. medicare eligibility age rises. democrats do not like that idea as nancy pelosi explained yesterday. >> first of all, show me the money. i don't even know why that is something that people think is going to produce money. what are we going to do with people between 65 and 67? show me the money there. but it's not even the right thing to do, first and foremost. but is it a trophy that the republicans want? is that the trophy they want in order to do what is right to raise the rates for the wealthiest people in our country? >> let me say for the record i think pelosi is right. i don't think raising the age is the right idea. i'm going to show you the money later on. but what she did not do is not rule it out. if republicans end up getting it, it's something the obama administration told john boehner they were willing to trade away if republicans end up getting it, that will feel like a big win for them. enough to unlock the tax deal. i'm not saying the final negotiation here will be easy. one thing that's a tough sticking point in negotiations. we began tonight which the whi
of punch. that's what nancy pelosi meant when she called it a trophy. republicans see this as a big win for them. big. and that's kind of the white house's quiet argument. it's a terrible policy, but because obama care and employers and others are there to catch a lot of these people, it might get more republican votes while doing less harm to seniors than the alternatives. with the spark cash card from capital one, olaf gets great rewards for his small business! pizza! [ garth ] olaf's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! helium delivery. put it on my spark card! [ pop! ] [ garth ] why settle for less? great businesses deserve great rewards! awesome!!! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? [ nyquil bottle ] just reading your label. wait...you relieve nasal congestion? sure don't you? [ nyquil bottle ] dude! [ female announcer ] tylenol® cold multi-symptom nighttime relieves nasal congestion. nyquil® cold and flu doesn't. >>>
the wealthy. nancy pelosi was here last night talking to the president, i'm told. we are working this issue very hard, alex, as you're probably aware, trying to figure out the state of play here. there isn't much movement here. there wasn't a lot of information to share. everyone in washington that's close to this es being very cagey. the president is actually out golfing right now. i'm told john boehner the speaker has stayed in town this weekend, somewhat unusual for him. but as far as we can see, no movement, alex. >> okay. mike, now don't go too far. you're coming back as one of our esteemed guests in today's big panel. about 1:45. you're going to get all the hard questions. it's all coming your way. we'll see you in a bit. thank you. >>> the fiscal cliff is not just a concern for americans as my next guest learned on a recent trade mission to china where he was pat of a conference organized by former u.s. treasury secretary hank paulsen. joining me now, philadelphia mayor michael nutter here in studio. good day to you. >> good seeing you, alex. >> tell me first of all what was the miss
and nancy pelosi has said the same thing. and why i wonder -- why is this on the table? this is paul ryan's idea. >> yeah two parts to this. the first part during the election we talked about the $760 billion worth of savings that we had from medicare and the republicans railed against them as cuts and now they are asking to cut medicare. they want to protect your medicare and try to take money out of it at the same time. the second part -- >> stephanie: go ahead. >> oh sorry. >> stephanie: please phlegmy mcphlegmyson go ahead. >> you push people out in to the private insurance market and their premiums are going to be high, and it will raise generally for everybody. so not will it cost shift on to seniors who may forgo medicare because they can't afford it but it ends up raising the price of the insurance market overall. >> stephanie: and it is one of those things politically that oh that seems reasonable, and a concession we could make. but once again, they lost. a leading medicare expert says this has surpricing ripple effects. and the justification is people are l
elections are. collective bargaining. >> house democratic leader nancy pelosi pointed out jim demint was one of the ringleaders in voting down the u.n. treaty for people with disabilities this week. >> that was one of the saddest days, so anyone who was a party to that, well, i wish them well wherever they are going and hope that we can have more of our values represented there. >> it was demint and his tea party allies who pushed the country to the brink of default back in 2011. this is what demint told abc news about republicans who tried to strike a debt deal. >> what happens if -- what happens to republicans who go along with a debt ceiling increase? if they go along with the debt ceiling increase without a balanced budget amendment and the kind of stuff you're talking about? >> i think for the most part they're gone. it would be the most toxic vote we could take. >> demint's far right ideology is a key reason nothing gets done in this congress. house speaker john boehner is currently being pressured by demint and his followers to refuse any debt deal with tax increases. demint was on ru
we look at what's happening in washington, and, you know, one day it's nancy pelosi saying, "we're not going to compromise," the next day it's john boehner saying it. and then mitch mcconnell, the republican leader in the senate says, you know, what my goal is to make barack obama a one-term president. they're supposed to be leaders of the legislative branch of the government, not party hacks. and we have a system now, you know, that is all about looking toward the next election, how we do that. >> this is a strong indictment of the polarization of the two parties. >> yeah. >> but isn't the country also very polarized? >> the country is very polarized in some senses. but you also find the american people saying, "solve the problem. don't go over a fiscal cliff." or, you know, "pay our bills," or, "do something about the budget." now, i think even though the people tend to not be open to a lot of different views, they want the people they elect to make government work. >> so, we have created a political system that rewards intransigence. >> we've created a system that says, "we r
this in an acceptable way for the american people. >> woodruff: but house minority leader nancy pelosi fired back that republicans are the ones holding everything up. >> if we were waiting for something, we would say it's well worth the wait. but we're just-- the republicans are just delaying-- just delaying, delaying, delaying, and that's not responsible. >> woodruff: and federal reserve chairman ben bernanke warned again that delay is dangerous. >> well, cleary the fiscal cliff is having affects on the economy, even though we're not yet even reached the point of the fiscal cliff potentially kicking in, it's already affecting biz investment and hiring decisions by creating uncertainty, or creating pessimism. >> woodruff: all of which threatened to cast a pall over the holidays, at the capitol, and just about everywhere else. and that brings us to our continuing series of conversations on this topic. tonight, one of the more outspoken voices against raising taxes. grover norquist is a conservative lobbyist and the president of americans for tax reform. most famously, he's known for getting many e
. the president was here, but there were meetings yesterday. nancy pelosi came in and out. no one saw her. we thought reading the tea leaves maybe there would be some movement. there was some movement. the president is playing golf. haven't seen hide nor hair of john boehner. >> mike viqueira, thank you, good sir. for more insight into where all of this is headed and whether there could be a breakthrough, i'd like to bring in david jackson, white house reporter for "usa today," and the politics writer for "roll call." appreciate your time. david, what's your sense right now? how far apart are the two sides? >> i think they're closer than a lot of people think because as mike just mentioned the dispute the size of the tax increase on the wealthy. both sides have said they want to negotiate what that rate may be. as far as the republicans are concerned, they want more commitment from the white house for spending cuts particularly on entitlement programs like social security and medicare. one thing mike talked about the fact we haven't heard much from any of these guys the last few days. i think
the house when nancy pelosi was speaker. this was an unserious proposal. and i can understand why my good friend, the majority leader, would rather not vote on it, because i can't imagine that it would get many, if any, votes in the senate here as well. having made that point, with regard to pntr for russia, when the two parties first sat down to discuss the so-called fiscal cliff, it was widely assumed among republicans that president obama and democrats actually wanted to avoid it. that was the premise that any possible agreement had shown. that was the common goal, or so we thought. over the past couple of weeks it's become increasingly clear to many of us that we were simply wrong about that. incredibly, many top democrats, including the president, seemed perfectly happy -- perfectly happy -- to go off the cliff. that's why the president has been more interested in campaign rallies than actually negotiating a deal. and it explains why the president is now stubbornly insisting on raising tax rates when he himself said just last year that you could raise more revenue from capping deduct
? >> i believe it was yesterday. >> stephanie: discharge petition, you heard nancy pelosi talking about this. to vote on the middle class tax cuts in the house. he joins us now. good morning representative. >> good morning. thank you for having me. >> stephanie: was it yesterday you filed it? >> we filed it at noon yesterday. we've got over 150 folks signed on. >> stephanie: that's awesome. so just talk to us about what you think is going to happen and on what timeframe. >> well what it is -- what we're saying is yes, there's a lot of big issues to take care of. we all agree we're not going to let tax rates increase on those families making less than $250,000 which is, of course, everybody gets that break on their first $250,000 and 98% of people don't make that much. we said let's pass that. take that off the table. then come back to this other to end the drama. >> stephanie: what it does, it brings the senate past middle class tax cuts which president obama said he will sign immediately to the house. >> what w
in medicare. that's number one. on senator mcconnell's list of things he'd like to see done. nancy pelosi is even talking about, you know, it's not about race. it's about revenue. it's about getting the money we need to reduce the deficit. so atmospherics are better. we've got a chance. >> it sounds a lot better. we also try and figure out what the plan actually looks like just in terms of the ratio of spending cuts to tax increases or revenue increases. and there've been a lot of people who've gone back and forth. it started out where we were probably closer to three to one back last summer. and i thought that was what simpson-bowles laid out. then i've also seen something that was circulating last week, suggesting that the simpson-bowles plan really called for a one-to-one ratio. is that true? >> no. what we did is, we took current policy at that time. current policy at that time and bush tax cuts from the top 2% expiring and we took that as the baseline, and then what we did is we reformed the tax code so we could broaden the base, simplify the code and we got about $1 trillion of new
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)